SD 

,Ufe 



U-S. Comrni ne-e' on a<g^r>ct H'ure 



Acquiring \an<i ^or 






sWeds W IVie 



or -iVie 



protect »on of watev— 




Book Jl^ 



60th Congress, / HOUSE OP^ REPRKSENTAIIVES. \ Report 

2d Session. ) "(No. 2027. 



ACgnRlNi; LAND FOR THE PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS FOR THE 
CONSERVATION OF NAVIGABLE STREAMS. 



Fkbkiakv 



190;). 



-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state 
of the Union and ordered to be printed. 



Messrs. Weeks and Lever, from the Committee on Agriculture, 
submitted the following- 

REPORT. 

[To accompany S. 4825.] 



The Committee on Agriculture, to which was referred various bills 
for the protection of the watersheds of navigable streams, submits the 
following report, to accompany" Senate bill 482.5. 

After a thorough discussion of the purposes to be accomplished it 
was deemed advisable to report the accompanying bill, as meeting 
more fully than any other the needs of the situation. 

Section 1 proposes to give the consent of Congress to each of the 
several States of the Union to enter into any agreement or compact 
not in conflict with any law of the United States, with any State or 
States for the purpose of conserving the forests and water supply of 
the States entering into such agreement or compact. 

Section 2 appropriates the sum of $100,000 to enable the Secretary 
of Agriculture to cooperate with any State or group of States, when 
requested to do so. in the protection from fire of the forested water- 
sheds of navigable streams, and the Secretary is authorized to stipu- 
late and agree with any State or group of States to cooperate in the 
organization and maintenance of a system of tire protection on any 
private or state lands within such State or States and situated upon 
the watershed of a navigable river. 

The section further provides that no such stipulation or agreement 
shall be made with any State which has not provided by law for a S3'^s- 
tem of fire protection, and that in no case is the amount contributed to 
any State to exceed the amount appropriated by that State for the 
same purpose. 

Section 3 provides that the Secretary of Agriculture ma}^, for the 
protection of the watersheds of navigable streams, on such conditions 
as he deems wise, agree to administer and protect for a definite term 
of years any private forest lands situated upon any watershed whereon 



2 ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

lands may be permaiietif v reserved, held, and administered as nationa 
forest lands, and that in such case the owner shall cut and remove th( 
timber thereon only under such rules and reg-ulations as will provid( 
for the protection of th(^ fon-st in the aid of navioation. The sectioi 
provides that in no case is the Tnited States to be liable for any dam- 
age resulting- from tire or any other cause on such lands. 

Section 4 provides that from receipts from the sale or disposal ol 
any products or the use of lands or resources from the public lands 
MOW or hereafter to be set aside as national forests which may here- 
after be turned into the Treasur^'^ of the United States and which are 
not otherwise appropriated, there shall l)e aAailable $1,000,000 for the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 19u9, and not to exceed $2,000,000 for each 
fiscal year thereafter, to be used in the examination, survey, and ac- 
quirement of lands located on the headwaters of navigable streams, or 
those which are l)eing or which may be developed for navigable pur- 
poses, and further provides that the provisions of this section shall 
expire bj^ limitation on June 80, 1019. 

This section has two features not included in any of the other bills 
referred to the committee. The first is, that the proceeds from the 
present national forests, so far as they are at present unappropriated, 
are to be turned to the purchase of forest lands to the amounts above 
mentioned. The second feature is, that instead of limiting the acquisi- 
tions by purchase or otherwise for this purpose to any particular 
region or regions, such as the Southern Appalachian or White Moun- 
tain region, lands may be acquired on any watershed, so far as they 
fall within the purposes of the bill. 

Section 5 provides for the establishment of a National Forest Res- 
ervation Commission, to be composed of the Secretary of War, the 
Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, one member 
of the Senate, and one member of the House of Representatives, the 
object of the commission being to consider and pass upon such lands 
as may be reconimended for purchase and to fix the price or prices 
to be paid for such lands. It further provides for limiting incum- 
bency and for filling vacancies in the conmiission. 

Section 6 provides for an annual report to Congress of the operations 
and expenditures of the commission. 

Section 7 authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to examine and 
locate lands to be recommended to the National Forest Reservation 
Commission for purchase. The section also provides that a report 
shall be made to the Secretary of Agriculture by the Cxeological Survey 
showing in what way the control of such lands will promote or protect 
the navigation of streams on whose watersheds they lie. 

Sections 8 and 9 provide the method by which lands may be acquired 
by the Secretary of Agriculture after they have been approved by the 
National Forest Reservation Commission. 

Section 10 provides that the owner of the land from whom title 
passes to the United States ma}^, under certain conditions, reserve the 
minerals and merchantable timber within or upon such lands at the 
date of conversance, and provides the method Iw which the removal of 
such minerals or timber may thereafter be accomplished. 

Section 11 provides for the sale of small areas of agricultural lands 
which ma}' of necessity or by inadvertence be included in ti'acts acquired 
under this act. 



B 10 1909 

a or a 



A{ QUIKING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 3 

Sections 12 and 13 provide for the management as national forests 
of the lands so acquired and describe the limits of civil and criminal 
jurisdiction over them. 

Section 14 provides that 25 per cent of all moneys received from any 
naMonal forest acquired under this act shall be paid at the end of each 
year to the State in which such national forest is situated for the 
benefit of public schools and public roads. 

Section 15 provides for the necessar}'^ expenses of the commission 
and prescribes the manner of auditing and paying of the same. 

SCOPE OF THE KILL. 

This bill is general in its scope, and permits the acquirement of 
lands in any part of the United States where such acquisition can be 
shown to be advisable to the National Forest Reservation ('ommission. 
after the Geological Survej^ has determined that such acquisition will 
promote or protect the navigability of streams on whose watersheds 
the lands lie. 

INCOME KKOI THE NATIONAL FORESTS TO HE USED. 

The funds to be used under the provisions of this bill are a pre- 
scribed amount of those which come into the Treasury from the sale 
of the products or the use of the resources of the national forests so 
far as they are not now appropriated. The law at present provides 
that 25 per cent of the money so received shall be paid to the States 
or Territories in which such forests are located, for school and road 
purposes. It is to be particularly noted that this bill does not change 
that plan, but rather extends it to the States or Territories in which 
national forests may be acquired. The net amount received from the 
uses of the national forests for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1908, 
was $1,311,691.39. and for the present fiscal vear is estimated to be 
$1,500,000. 

RELATION OF FORESTS TO THE USE OF INLAND WATERWAYS 

The relation of forests to the use of the inland waterways is shown 
by the following quotations: 

Our river systems are better adapted to the needs of the people than those of any 
other country. In extent, distribution, navigability, and ease of use they stand 
first. Yet the rivers of no other civilized country are so poorly developed, so little 
used, or play so small a part in the industrial life of the nation. » 

The first requisite for waterway improvement is the control of the waters in such 
manner as to reduce floods and regulate the regimen of the navigable streams. & 

Every stream should be used t > the utmost; every river sysrtem, from its head- 
waters in the forest to its mouth on the coast, is a single unit and should be treated 
as such, c 

A mountain watershed denuded of its forest, with its surface hardened and baked 
by exposure, will discharge its fallen rain into the streams so quickly that over- 
whelming floods will descend in wet seasons. In discharging in this torrential way 
the water carries along great portions of the land itself. Deep gullies are washed in 

o Preliminary Report of the Inland Waterways Commission. Senate Document 
325, Sixtieth Congress, first session. 

b Report of the National Conservation Commission. Senate Document 676, Sixtieth 
Congress, second session. 

c Preliminary Report of the Inland Waterways Commission. Senate Document 325, 
Sixtieth Congress, first session, page 2. 



4 ACQX'TRTXG LAND FOE PROTECTIOjST OF WATEKSHEDS, ETC. 

the fields, and the soil, s^and, gavel, and stone are carried down the streams to points 
where the current slackens. Since the extensive removal of the forest on the upper 
watersheds there has heen avast accumulation of silt, sand, and gravel in the upper- 
stream courses. Examples of reservoirs completely filleil are already to be seen on 
almost every stream. In the degree that the forests are <lamaged on the high water- 
sheds, then inevitable damage results to water power and navigation through increased 
extremes of high and low water and through vast deposits of gravel, sand, and silt 
in the stream channels and in any reservoir which may have been constructed. « 

The chief obstacles to navigation, then, are lack of water during portions of the 
year, and detritus whit'h is washed into the streams and gi-adually fills the channels 
or forms obstructions at the mouth. Were the flow uniform, the amount of water 
carried by a river during the year would be sufficient to ])rovide a good depth at all 
times. But the flow is uneven; there is too much water at one time and not enough 
at another. The floods of the spring waste the water which should be available to 
maintain a navigable depth during the summer and fall. To lessen this ine(iuality 
of flow should therefore be the aim of all measures for the development of our water- 
ways. If the rivers could be kept always in gentle flood, a relatively small expendi- 
ture for reservoirs, locks, and dams would be recpiired. In the same way, if means 
could be found to prevent silt and sand from bi ing washed into the streams the 
enormous cost of dredging would be largely done away with. The function of the 
forest and of the humus beneath as a storage reservoir is of high importance, yet in 
relation to navigation and the storage of storm waters the influence which the forest 
has in checking erosion is of equal, if not greater value, b 

In the Southern Appalachians the fullest use of water resources can be secured only 
by carefully guarding the natural conditions which control thein. The valuable 
water resources of this region depend absolutely upon the maintenance of a protect- 
ive forest cover. Without this forest cover the water power of the region can never 
be developed to the full, and in the same way the navigable streams can not be kept 
from silting up if the forest cover about their headwaters is removed. The protec- 
tion of these areas is a large undertaking, but it is necessarily the first undertaking, 
since it is fundamental to the development and utilization of the water resources. If 
the forest is not first pi-otected, damage to water resources will be far-reaching. If 
the forest is preserved, the benefits from the standpoint of water utilization will be 
widely diffused, even far beyond the ))orders of the Appalachain region, c 

The opinions here quoted represent the almost unanimous view of 
all who have investig'ated the relation between mountain forests and 
navigable rivers. The bill which the committee has reported is in line 
with the policy of conservation as recommended b^y the President and 
the National Conservation Commission. It provides for establishino- 
an adequate programme of protection to the mountain forests b}" giv- 
ing the Federal Government the right to cooperate with the States or 
with private individuals, and b}^ the acquisition of lands where such is 
necessary. Further, it provides the most natural arraiigement for 
defraying the cost of such acquisition— that of using the funds which 
come to the Treasur}' from the national forests already established, 
and the bill necessitates the appropriation of no additional sums of 
money in the carrying out of this project. 

It has been the policy of the Government to improve its navigable 
streams l)y the expenditure of large sums of money, in some cases at 
their headwaters. For example, a series of reservoirs has been con- 
structed at the headwaters of the Mississippi at a cost of approxi- 
mately $2,000,000. Locks and dams have been constructed on the 
Mono'ngahela River at a cost of $2,479,818.48: on the xillegheny River, 
$1,658,423.18; and on the Ohio River in Pennsylvania, $5, 385, 060. 78^ 
Expenditures have been made on the headwaters of the Sacramento 

oReport of the Secretary of Agriculture on the Southern Appalachian Watersheds. 
Senate Document 91, Sixtieth Congress, first session. 

b Report of the U. S. Geological Survey to the Department of Agriculture. Forest 
Service Circular No. 143. 

c Report of the U. S. Geological Survey to the Department of Agriculture. Forest 
Service Circular No. 144. 



ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 5 

River amounting to SiOO,(.M)o for the construction of dams for the 
purpose of preventino- the silting- up of the lower channel of the river 
as a result of hydraulic mining in the mountains. 

In France, the first efforts to repair the disastrous torrents were 
made b}' engineers along the lower water courses. Dredging and 
dams, however, proved at best but tem])orarily efi'ective. Onh' when 
the}^ began to push this work up to the headwaters of the streams did 
they find themselv^es on the right road. 

RELATION OF THE FORESTS TO FEOODS. 

Flood damage in the United States has increased from $45,000,000 
in 1900 to Sil8,000,00q in 1907. All rivers on whose w-atersheds the 
forests have been heavily cut show flood increases. They are greatest 
in such streams as the Ohio, Cumberland, Wateree, and Santee, where 
the most timber has been removed, and least in those streams on whose 
watersheds forest conditions have been least changed. Except in the 
change of forest conditions there have been no factors that could have 
intensified flood conditions. In the Ohio River in seventy years the 
number of floods at Wheeling has increased 62 per cent and their 
aggregate duration 110 per cent. 

In the Cumberland River at Burnside, Ky., the number of floods 
increased 380 per cent in tlie fifteen years between 1891 and 1905 and 
the duration in the same proportion. During the same period in the 
Wateree River at Camden, S. C, the number of floods increased 65 
per cent and the duration 82 per cent. In the Congaree River the in- 
crease during the same time has been 91 per cent in number and 113 
per cent in duration. In the Savannah River at Augusta, Ga., be- 
tween the years 1876 and 1905 the increase in the number of floods 
has been 91- per cent and in duration 266 per cent. Between 1891 and 
1905 the Alabama River at Salem. Ala., had an increase in number of 
floods of S3 per cent and in duration of 31 per cent. 

The Greological Survey has made a careful study of floods in the 
Tennessee River during the past thirty-four years, and has found that 
on the basis of equal rainfall floods in the last half of the period have 
increased 18f per cent. 

At the Tenth International Congress on Ts'avigatiop., held in Milan in 
1905, engineers from the various countries of Europe were unanimously 
of the opinion that mountain forests were beneficial in preventing 
floods, in regulating the low water in streams, and in retaining the 
soil upon the mountains. 

RELATION OF FORESTS TO SOIL WASH. 

The annual soil wash in the United States is estimated by tlie Inland 
Waterways Commission atabout 1,000,000,000 tons, of which the greater 
part is the most valuable portion of the soil. It is carried into the 
rivers, where it pollutes the waters, necessitates frequent and costly 
dredging, and reduces the efficiency of work designed to facilitate 
navigation and prevent floods. Soil when once lost is replaced with 
great difficulty, if at all. Consequenth^ the protection of the forests 
on the slopes which are too steep otherwise to he utilized means 
actually immense o-ain in soil conservation. 



6 ACQUIETIS'G LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

Not only is soil removed in great quantities from mountain surfueo. 
but the floods which gather on denuded mountain slopes inevital)!y 
result in the destruction of the alluvial soils along the river cnnrscs. 

OTHEl! IlKNiarrs KRO^I FOKKST I'lmSEltVATlON. 

The protection to navioai)le streams is the chief purpose of the pro- 
posed legislation. Incidentally, there will he great benefits to the 
whole country in other directions. Water ])ower, like navigation, 
depends on the regular flow of the streams. The amount of water 
power capable of developujent in the United States is sutiicient to 
operate every mill, drive ever}' spindle, propel every train and boat, 
and light every city, town, and village in the country. The continued 
successful development of many of our industries in the future 
depends in large part upon the present protection of our inland water- 
ways. y\'e are using- three times as much timber every- year as the 
forest produces, not because we have an insufficient area of forest 
land, but because our forests are not protected from fire nor properly 
used. The eastern forests are notable for their hard-wood production, 
half of the country's supply" being obtained from this source. The 
proposed bill svill give protection to the chief hard-wood forests of the 
country. 

EXPERIENCE OF OTHER COUNTRIES PROVES THAT THE FROTEOTION 
OF THE FORESTS AT THE HEADWATERS OF IMPORTANT STREAMS IS 
IMPERATIA E. 

The relation of the mountain forests to the navigability of inland 
water is the same the world over. Every country that has maintained 
an even and sufficient liow of streams for the purposes of commerce 
has had to maintain and in some cases establish upon the headwaters 
of the streams forests to hold the soil in place and to prevent over- 
whelming floods. 

Germany stands in the forefront of nations in inland waterway 
development, and she has all of her high mountains ])rotected by 
forests. These forests have been under government management for 
a hundred years and they are the most productive and profitable 
in the world, yielding an average net return of ^2.40 per acre. 

The stripping of the forests from the mountains of France was 
unchecked until 1860, by which time 8O(),0()0 acres of farm land had 
been ruined or seriously damaged and the waterways practically 
destroyed. The population of 18 departments had been reduced to 
poverty and forced to emigrate. A futile attempt was then made to 
check the torrents by sodding. It was only ]>y the acquisition by the 
Government of the bare lands, the building of stone walls for the 
gathering of silt and the planting of trees on the soil held in check by 
those walls that satisfactorv results were accomplished. The cost 
of this method has often been as much as $50 per acre. By 1900 
$15,000,000 had been spent and the French Government has continued 
the work by acquiring each year 25,000 to 30,000 acres of land. The 
present programme calls for the expenditure of $50,000,000 on this 
work. About one-fourth of the mountain streams have been brought 
under control and the balance are beginning to shosv indications of 
improvement. 



ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 7 

Italy has .sutfered extreiiiely from the ruin which follows the re- 
moval of protective fore.-^ts. One-third of all the land is unproductive, 
and though some of this area may be made to support forest growth, 
one-fourth of it is beyond reclamation, mainl}^ as the result of cleared 
hillsides and the pasturing of goats. The rivers are dry in summer; 
in spring they are wild torrents, and the floods, brown with the soil 
of the hillsides, bury the fertile lowland fields. The hills are scored 
where the rains have loosened the soil, and landslides have loft exposed 
the sterile rocks, on which no vegetation finds a foothold. Such floods 
as that of 1897, near P)ologna, which did over !?1,000,UOO damage, 
destroy property and life. 

The dearth of wood and especially the great need of protecting forests 
to control stream flow have brought some excellent forest laws. In 
spite of the first general forest law (1877), which regulated cutting and 
forbade clearing on mountain slopes, large areas have persistentl}- been 
cleared, and though provision has been made for thorough reforesting 
worl?, very little of the needed planting has been done. The classifi- 
cation of the lands to which restriction shall and shall not apply is a 
constant matter of dispute. An effort has been made to show that the 
forest planting contemplated b}' law is largely unnecessar3^ The last 
point, however, has been safely settled b\' reconnnendations of a recent 
connnission, which declare that at least 500,000 acres w^ll have to be 
planted, at a cost of not less than §1:2, 000, 000, before the destructive 
torrents, brought on l)y stripping and overgrazing the hillsides, can 
be controlled. 

Spain has sufiered greath' from destriK^tive floods caused by insuffi- 
cient forests on the mountains. She has enacted an elaborate system 
of laws to prevent overcutting, but the indel)tedness of the country 
has prevented the efficient carrying out of these laws. 

Other countries which are working out comprehensive schemes of 
protecting forests at the headwaters of mountain streams are England 
in India, Switzerland. Austria-Hungary, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, 
Russia, Roumania, and ,Tapan. 

China holds a unique position as the only great country which has 
persistently destroyed its forests. What has been done in other coun- 
tries stands out in bold relief against the background of China, whose 
mountains and hills have been stripped nearly clean of trees, and whose 
soil is in many districts completely at the mercy of floods. Trees have 
l)een left only where they could not be reached. Streams which for- 
merly were narrow and deep, with an even flow of water throughout 
the year, are now broad, shallow beds choked with gravel, sand, and 
rocks from the mountains. During most of the year many of fhem 
are entirely dry, but when it rains the muddy torrents come pouring 
down, bringing destruction to life and all forms of property. In a 
word, the Chinese, by forest waste, have brought upon themselves two 
costly calamities — floods and water famine. The forest school just 
opened at Mukden is the flrst step in the direction of repairing this 
waste so far as it now may be repaired. 

The results of deforestation in China are particularly discussed and 
graphically illustrated in the President's annual message to the second 
xSession of the Sixtieth Congress. 



8 ACQUTRTNG LAND FOR PEOTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, lvl'(\ 

CON(^LUSION8, 

The great increa!?e in tioocls in our rivers, together with the increas- 
iug- property loss and annual loss of soils, shows that in some sections 
of the country we are rapidl}^ approaching the situation in which 
China now finds herself. It is not now too late for nature to restore 
the forests on the mountains, but the time is rapidly coming when it 
will be. The question of protecting the forests at the headwaters of 
the streams is a national as well as a state problem. It is not right to 
expect the State to deal entireh^ with areas requiring protection when 
those areas affect chiefly other States. It is impossible for States 
which suffer from conditions outside their own territory to remedy 
them by their own action. The mountains of the West are already 
largely under government protection. So far as they are not pro- 
tected this bill is applicable to them. It is applicable to all other sec- 
tions of the United States in which the source streams of the navic^able 
rivers lie in nonagricultural, mountainous regions, and it is believed 
that it will accomplish the necessary protection to the Southern 
Appalachians and White Mountains. 

If the action which this bill proposes is taken by Congress, it will 
work out to the great benefit of both agriculture and the manufactur- 
ing industries, while to the permanent development of our inland- 
waterways the bpni^fits \\\]] he fundam(nital. 

KiTTREDGE HasKINS. 

William W. Cocks. 
Ralph D. Cole. 
F^RNEST M. Pollard. 
Clarence C. Gilhams. 
James C. jVIcLaughlin. 
John W. Weeks. 
John IjAmb. 
AsBURY F. Lever. 
Augustus O. Stanley. 
J. Thomas Heflin. 

Your committee therefore lecujnmend that ail after the enacting- 
clause of Senate l>ill 4:8"2.5 be stricken out and the followijig inserted 
in lieu thereof: 

That the consent of the Congress of the United States is hereby given to each of 
the several States of the Union to enter into any agreement or compact, not in con- 
fiict ^'ith any law of the United States, with any oti er State or States, for the pur- 
pose of conserving the forests and the water supply of the States entering into such 
agreement or compact. 

Sec. 2. That the sum of one hiuidred thousand dollars is hereby approjiriated and 
made available until exi)ended, out of any moneys in the National Treasury not 
otherwise appropriated, to enaV)le the Secretary of Agriculture to cooperate with anj' 
State or group of States, when requested 1o do so, in the protection from tire of the 
forested watersheds of navigable streams, and the Secretary of Agriculture is hereby 
authorized, and on such conditions as he deems wise, to stipulate and agree with any 
State or group of States to cooperate in the organization and maintenance of a system 
of fire protection on any private or state forest lands within such State or States and 
situated upon the watershed of a navigable river: Proi-kled, That no such stipulation 
or agreement shall lie made with any State which has not provided by law for a 
system of forest-fire protection: Provided fvrllier, That in no case shall the amount 
expended in any State exceed in anj' fiscal year the amount appropriated by that 
State for the same purpose during the same fiscal year. 

Sec. 3. That the Secretary of Agriculture, for the further protection of the water- 
sheds of said navigable streams, may, in his discretion, and he is herehy authorized, 



ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 9 

on such conditions as he deems wise, to stipulate and agree to administer and protect 
for a definite term of years any private forest lands situated upon any such watershed 
whereon lands may be permanently reserved, held, and aclministered as national 
forest lands; but such stipulation or agreement shall provide that the owner of such 
private lands shall cut and remove the timVjer thereon only undei- such rules and 
regulations, to be expressed in the stipulation or agreement, as will provide for the 
protection of the forest in the aid of navigation: Provided, Hiat in no case shall the 
tJnited States be liable for any damage resulting from fire or any other cause. 

Sec. 4. That from the receipts accruing from the sale or disposal of any products 
or the use of lands or resources from public lands, now or hereafter to be set aside as 
national forests that have been or may hereafter be turned into the Treasury of the 
United States and which are not otherwise approj)riated, there is hereby appropriated 
for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and nine, the sum of one 
million dollars, and for each fiscal year thereafter a sum not to exceed two million 
dollars for use in the examination, survey, and acquirement bf lands located on the 
headwaters of navigable streams or those which are being or which may be developed 
for navigable purposes: J'rorided, That the provisions of this section shall expire by 
limitation on the thirtieth day of June, nineteen hundred and nineteen. 

Sec. 5. That a commission, to be known as the National Forest Reservation Commis- 
sion, consisting of the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary 
of Agriculture, and one member of the Senate, to be selected by the President of the 
Senate, and one member of the House of Kepresentatives, to be selected by the 
Speaker, is hereby created and authorized to consider and jiass upon such lands as 
may be recommended for purchase as jirovided in section six of this act, and to fix 
the price or prices at which such lands may be purchased, and no purchases shall be 
made of any lands until such lands have been duly approved for purchase by said 
commission: Frocided, That the members of the commission herein cieated shall 
setve as such only during their incumbency in their respective oflicial positions, and 
any vacancy on the commission shall be filled in the manner as the original appoint- 
ment. 

Sec. (i. That the connuission hereby ajipointed shall, through its president, annu- 
ally report to Congre.'^s, not later than tie first Monday in December, the operations 
and expenditures of the commission, in detail, during the preceding fiscal year. 

Sec. 7. That the Secretary of Agriculture is hereby authorized and directed to 
examine, locate, and recommend tor purchase such lands as in his judgment may be 
necessary to the regulation of the flow of navigable streams, and to report to the 
National Forest Reservation Commission the results of such examinations: I'londid, 
That before any lands are inirchased l)y the National Forest Reservation Commission 
said lands shall be examined by the (Jeological Survey and a report made to the 
Secretary of Agricultuie, showing that the control of such lands will promote or 
protect the navigation of streams on whose watersheds they lie. 

Sec. 8. That the Secretary of Agriculture is hereby authorized to purchase, in the 
name of the United States, such lands as have been approved for purchase by the 
National Forest Reservation Conimis-sion at the price or prices fixed by saiii commis- 
.sion: I'rovided, That no deed or other instrument of conveyance shall be accejited or 
approved by the Secretary of Agriculture under this act until the legislature of the 
State in which the land lies shall have consented to the acquisition of such land bj' 
the United States for the purpose of preserving the navigability of navigable streams. 

Sec 9. That the Secretary of Agriculture may do all things necessary to secure the 
safe title in the United States to the lands to be acquired under this act; but no 
payment shall be made for any such lands nntil the title shall be satisfactory to the 
Attorney-General and shall be vested in the United States. 

Sec. 10. That such acquisition may in any case be conditioned upon the exception 
and reservation to the owner, from whom title passes to the United States, of tiie 
minerals and of the mei'chantable timl)er, or either or any part of them, within or 
upon such lands at the date of the coTiveyance; but in every case such exception and 
reservation, and the time within which such timber shall be removed, and the rules 
and regulations under which the cutting and removal of such timber and the mining 
and removal of such minerals shall be done shall be expressed in tl.e written instru- 
ment of conveyance, and thereafter the mining, cutting, and removal of the minerals 
and tindier so'excejited and reserved shall be done only under and in obedience to 
the rules and regulations so expressed. 

Sec. 11. That whereas small areas of land chiefiy valuable for agriculture may of 
necessity or by inadvertence be included in tracts ac<juired under this act, the Sec- 
retary of Agriculture may, in his discretion, and he is hereby authorized, upon ap- 
plication or otherwise, to examine and ascertain the location and extent of such 
areas as in his opinion may be occupied for agricultural purj-oses without injury to 
the forests or to stream flow and which are ni't neede^I for pui>lic puriioses. and may 



10 ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

list and describe the sauie by metes and bounds, or otherwise, and offer them fo 
sale as homestead.s at their true value, to be fixed by him, to actual settlers, in tract 
not exceeding eighty acres in area, under sucli joint rules and regulations as th 
Secretary of Agric^ulture and the Secretary of thu Interior may prescribe; and ii 
case of such sale the jurisdiction over the lands sold shall, ipso facto, revert to th 
State in which the lands sold lie. And no right, title, interest, or claim in or to an; 
lands acquired under this act, or the waters thereon, or the i)roducts, resources, o 
use thereof after such lands shall have been so acquired, shad be initiated or per 
fected, except as in this section provided. 

Sec. 12. That, subject to the provisions of the last preceding section, the land 
acquired under this act shall be permanently reserved, held, and administered a 
national forest lands under the provisions of section twenty-four of the act approve^ 
March third, eighteen hundred and ninety-one (volume twenty-six, Statutes a 
Large, page eleven hundred and three), and acts supplemental to and amendator 
thereof.- And the Secretary of Agri(;ulture may from time to time divide the land 
acquired under this act into such specific national forests and so designate the sam 
as he may deem best for administrative purposes. 

Sec. 18. That the jurisdiction, both civil and criminal, over pensons upon the land 
acquired under this act shall not be affected or changed by their permanent reser 
vation and administration as national forest lands, except so far as the punishmen 
of offenses against the Unitei.1 States is concerned, the intent and meaning of thi 
section being that the State wherein such land is situated shall not, by reason of sue 
reservation and administration, lose its jurisdiction nor the iiihal)itants thereof thei 
rights and privileges as citizens or be absolved from their duties as citizens of th 
State. 

Sec. 14. That twenty-five per centum of all moneys received during any fiscal yea 
from each national forest into which the lands ac(|uired under this act may from tim 
to time be divided shall be paid, at the end of such year, by the Secretary of th 
Treasury to tlie State in which such national forest is situated, to be expended as th 
state legislature may prescribe for the benefit of the public schools and public road 
of the county or counties in which such national forest is situated: I'rovided, Tha 
when any national forest is in more than one Stale or county the distributive shar 
to each from the proceeds of such forest shall be proportional to its area therein 
Provided further. That there shall not be paid to any State for any county an amoun 
equal to more than forty per centum of the total income of such county from all othe 
sources. 

Sec. 15. That a sum sufiicient to pay the necessary expenses of the commissio 
and its members, not to exceed an animal expenditure of twenty-five thousand do! 
lars, is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appro 
priated. Said appropriation shall be innnediately available and shall be paid ou 
on the audit and order of the president of the said commission; which audit an( 
order shall be conclusive and binding upon all depiirtments as to the correctness c 
the accounts of said commission. 

Amend the title so as to read: " An act to enable any State to co 
operate with any other State or States, or with the United States, fo 
the protection of the watersheds of navigable streams, and to appoin 
a commission for the acquisition of lands for the purpose of conserv 
ing" the naxigability of navigable rivers." 



VIEW8 OF THE MINORITY. 

In the tir«t session of the Sixtieth Congress, reporting- upon a reso- 
lution offered by Mr. Bartlett, of Georgia, the Committee on the 
Judiciary of the House of Representatives declared it to be their 
opinion that — 

The Federal Government hay no i)o\ver to acquire lands within a State solely for 
forest reserves, but under its constitutional power over navigation the Federal Gov- 
ernment may appropriate for the purcliase of lands' and fore.' t reserves in a i^tate, 
provided it is made clearly to appear that such lands and forest reserves have a 
direct and substantial connection with the conservation and improvement of the 
navigability of a river actually navigable in whole or in part. 

Bearing that opinion in mind (and it has met with universal acquies- 
cence), it hpcomes of the ver}' first importance, in considering a bill for 
the purchase of forest reserves, to determine whether such reserves 
"have a direct and substantial connection with the conservation and 
improvement of the navigability of a I'iver actually navigable in whole 
or in part.'' The statement that sucli connection does exist has been 
so confidently assumed and so often repeated that those wlio have 
given but a casual or superficial study to the subject have come to 
regard it as an established and admitted fact. 

The truth is that it is neither established nor admitted. On the con- 
trary, the proposition is very earnestly dis])uted by men whose opin- 
ions are entitled to great weight. It is perhaps not overstating it to 
say that a majority of the riparian engineers who have given the sub- 
ject careful study are of the opinion that foi'ests do not exercise any 
effective control in either extremes of high water or of low water. 
Lieut. Col, H. M. (yhittenden, of the United States Army Engineer 
Corps, who has been studying the control of floods in rivers for many 
years, is perhaps the most conspicuous exponent of this view in our 
own country, having recently read a paper before the American 
Societ}^ of Engineers in which is presented a powerful and to many 
minds a convincing argument in support of his contention. In Europe 
the same opinion is entertained by M. Ernst Lauda, chief of the 
hydrographic bureau of the Austrian Government, wlio has recently 
made an exhaustive report upon the great floods of the Danube, in the 
course of which he says: 

It is universally believed that forests have an influence in moderating and prevent- 
ing floods, and deforestation upon their origin and more frequent occurrence, yet this 
belief is not better established from a hydrographic standpoint than the entirely un- 
founded belief that the floods of the past few years in Austria are due to deforesta- 
tion. Against the popular belief in the favorable influence of forests upon floods 
resulting from excessive rains may be adduced the interesting fact that lands richest 
in forests are frequently visited by the severest floods. 

In support of this opinion he traces the historj- of the Danube River 
for eight hundred years, drawing the conclusion that Hoods were for- 
merly just as frequent and just as high in that river as they have been 
in recent times. He cites the records of the river Seine also showing 

11 



12 ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

even greater flood height in the sixteenth centur3' than any that oc- 
curred in the nineteenth. As deforestation in the watersheds in both 
the Danube and the Seine is vastly greater now than it was eight cen- 
turies or three centuries ago, the testimon}^ of the actual records pre- 
sented by M. Lauda can not be lightly set aside. Nor can it be said 
that M. Lauda stands alone in his opinion, for at the Tenth Interna- 
tional Congress of Navigation, held at Milan in 1905. papers upon this 
subject W'Cre presented by representatives from France, Germany, 
Italy, Austria, and Russia, and while all the writers favored forest 
culture the opinion was practically unanimous that forests exert no 
appreciable influence upon the stream flow of rivers. 

Indeed, Colonel Chittenden, w ho has perhaps studied foreign reports 
upon this subject more carefully than any other American, declares 
that he is unable to find among the river engineers of Europe any that 
advocate forests as a corrective for the extremes of flow in our rivers. 
He cites an exceedingly elaborate investigation instituted by Napoleon 
III, as a result of which the French engineers, after an exhaustive 
study of the subject, united in the opinion that whatever value forests 
might have localh'^ in preventing the erosion of steep slopes they could 
not be relied upon in any degree to diminish the great floods from 
which France had been suflering, and that any measures wiiich might 
be taken in the line of reforestation would have no appreciable efi'ect. 
The report of these engineers quoted a very elaborate and exhaustive 
work upon the floods of French rivers, going back over six hundred 
years, in which it was conclusively shown that former floods were 
larger than those of the present time. As a result of this report it is 
declared that no French project of river improvement, either for flood 
prevention or as an insurance against low water in navigable rivers, 
has embraced reforestation as an essential part or even any part at all. 

In our own country, where river records have beejj kept but a com- 
paratively short time, the data are of course insuflicient to warrant 
an}' very sweeping generalizations. We believe it is admitted, how- 
ever, that the records of the Ohio River, which extend over a period 
of forty years, show greater extremes of both high water and low 
water during the first twenty years of that period than during the last 
twenty years, thus bearing out in a degree at least the conclusions 
reached through a study of the extended periods of observation of 
European rivers. While it can not be regarded, therefore, as fuUj^ 
established, we submit that the weight of expert testimony and the 
preponderance of evidence as deduced from actual observation is very 
largel}' in favor of the proposition that forests do not exercise an 
appreciable influence upon the navigability of navigable rivers. 

But the argument against the proposition in the bill under consid- 
eration by no means rests alone upon the contention that there is no 
vital connection between the forests and the maintenance of naviga- 
bilit}^ in naviga})le streams. It is a conceded fact that at the present 
time, in the southern Appalachians at least, the menace to the streams 
comes from the operations of the farmer and not from those of the 
lumberman. It is the tracts on the lower slopes of the mountains 
which have been cleared for farming from which the silt is washed 
into the streams and not from the upper slopes, which are cov^ered 
with trees. Now, it is not denied that if these lower slopes are prop- 
erly farmed the soil will not wash appreciably, and the streams there- 
fore will receive no damage. It is not denied eithei- that if the steeper 



ACQUIRHsTr LAND FOR PRlKriit'TION OF WATHES blEDS, ETC. 13 

slopes, which never can be farmed, are protected from tire they will 
always be forested, or at least covered with a g-rowth that will prevent 
erosion. 

Kememberino- these two undeiiied facts, can it be arj4ued that it is 
necessary for the Government to purchase either the upper or the 
lower slopes of the mountains in order to protect the streams? The 
lower slopes are more valuable for farming- than for timber raising if 
they can be prevented from erosion. Since they can be so prevented 
by proper methods of tillage, m ould it not be better national economy 
for the Federal Government to help teach the farmers of that region 
how to till their soil in such a way as to prevent erosion and maintain 
its fertility than it would be to buy out those farmers and return the 
land to the wilderness? And since the upper slopes will always have a 
forest cover, if protected from tire, would it not be better national 
economy for the Federal (xovernnient to lend its aid to such protec- 
tion at a comparatively trifling cost (it is estimated by the Forest Serv- 
ice that the cost of an etfective fire patrol would not exceed 2 cents per 
acre per annum) than to buy the land at a very g-reat initial expendi- 
ture, with the cost of fire protection to be added as a fixed and con- 
tinuing charge i Would it not be better for the States concerned to 
have the lands remain in private ownership, supporting a larger popu- 
lation than could possibh' be maintained if the policy of the pending 
bill is pursued, and retaining the value of the property on the tax 
rolls? 

The very best that can l)e said in support of the proposition for the 
federal purchase of these lands is that as a result of such purchase the 
impairment of navigable streams may possibly be diminished or 
retarded. But will this vague general possibility, or probability, of 
a distant and shadow}^ good ofiset the innnediate and certain evil of 
driving large numbers of people away from homes which in many 
instances have been occupied for generations, of reducing the produc- 
tivity of large areas, and of taking large amounts of property from 
local tax rolls? 

It is cited as a special merit in the pending bill that the money to 
carry it into efiect is taken not from the General Treasury but from 
the receipts of the existing Forest Service, the agreeable inference 
therefrom being that the proposed new forests can be bought without 
any real draft*upon the Treasury. We are unable to see the force of 
this argument. The receipts from the present national forests are not 
a new source of income conjured into existence by the pending bill. 
On the contrary, these receipts are a part of the national revenues 
which are paid into the Federal Treasury, just as are the revenues from 
customs dues or internal taxation. To regard the income from the 
forests as a special fund which can be diverted without any real effect 
upon the Treasury balances is a palpable fiction, which if adopted 
would expose the Congress to the charge of doing by indirection what 
it was not willing to do directly. If we are going to enter upon this 
policy, let us do it openly and boldly with a full understanding of 
what it will cost and where the money is to come from. 

In its terms, the life of the measure being limited to ten years and 
the expenditures under it restricted in the aggregate to $19,000,000, 
this bill is extremely conservative compared with others that have been 
introduced upon the same subject. It is to be noted, however, that it 
is applicable to every section of the country, and that the foremost ad- 



14 ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

vocates of the policy' wliich it initiates maintain that the policy can 
only be carried to a successful issue through the purchase of many 
million acres of land. The last ofticial report upon the subject recom- 
mended the purchase of 5,000,000 acres in the southern Appalachians 
and 600,000 acres in the White Mountains, the average estimnted cost 
being $3.50 an acre. But it states also (on page 32) that there are 
75,000,000 acres in these mountains which ''will have to be given pro- 
tection before the hard-wood supply is on a safe footing and before the 
watersheds of the important streams are adequately safeguarded." 
While no one now advocates the purchase of this enormous area, yet 
with the policy once entered upon and backed by the tremendous polit- 
ical and industrial influences that can be brought to its support, who 
can give assurance that such purchases may not be made in the future 
and the cost of this policy be thereby extended from tens of millions 
to hundreds of millions? 

Notwithstanding the enormous expenditure^ which will almost in- 
evitably result from the entrance upon this policy, it might still be 
warranted if it were a demonstrated fact that the maintenance of the 
forested watersheds is the only way by which the filling up of navi- 
gable streams and the destructive erosion of large sections of our 
country can be prevented, and that the only means by which forested 
watersheds can be maintained is through federal ownership of such 
watersheds. Believing, however, that this destructive erosion and 
consequent silting of rivers can be prevented by the introduction of 
proper metliods of farming and by adequate tire protection, both of 
which can be accomplished through the cooperation of state and fed- 
eral agencies at comparatively little expense, we are unwilling to con- 
sent to a measure which commits the Government to a policy which 
we believe to be both imwise and unnecessary. 

CuAS. F. Scott. 

Wm. Lorimer. 

Geo. W. Cook. 

Jack Beall. 

W. W. RUCKEK. 



YIEWJS OF MK. HAWLEY. 

in addition to joining in the dissent of the minority and coiiuuending- 
its vigorous presentation of the matter. I desire to add the following 
observations: 

This bill provides for the acquisition of lands anywhere in the 
United States for the establishment of new forest reserves or national 
forests. These lands are to be acquired from the present private 
owners upon the recommendation of a commission, as provided in the 
bill. It is stated that the i)urpose of such ac([nisitions is to preserve 
and improve the navigability of navigable rivers, apparently following 
the opinion of the Conunittee on the Judiciary of the House, as 
expi-essed in House Report No. 1514 of this Congress. It is inferred 
that if the policy proposed in the bill is carried out, under the terms 
and by the means therein set forth, that in due time extremes of high 
and low water in navigable rivers will be regulated, and the hindrance 
to navigation due to the deposit of silt will be controlled. The vital 
question at this point is, '• Will this be the results" li not, then the 
theory on which the bill is l)ased fails, and its justilication also fails, 
under report No. 1514, referred to abov(\ Upon this relation between 
the proposed control and navigation or stream flow the authorities 
disagree, as set forth at length in the preceeding opinion of the 
niinorit}'. And no agreement exists as to where the necessarj'^ lands 
lie or as to what is their nature. 

The bill also provides that for the same purposes the Government 
may administer private forest lands adjacent to the lands in the pi'o- 
posed new reserves, for a term of years, upon agreement with the 
owners. There is little evidence to >ihow whether few or many owners 
of forest lands will so agree, and in my judgment not many will accept 
the terms proposed. If they do not. tlie amount of land necessary to 
be acquired by the National Government in order to carry out the 
policy in the Ivill will be increased and add largely to the appropria- 
tions required. 

It is proposed to appropriate from the revenues of existing forest 
reserves $1,000,000 for the first year, and $2,000,000 annually there- 
after for a period of nine years, in all $19,000,000. In view of the 
large areas it is proposed to control, this amount must be regarded 
rather as an experimental appropriation than as a sum adequate to 
accomplish the purposes of the bill. The report of the Secretary of 
Agriculture, made in compliance with the provision in the agricultural 
appropriation bill, approved March 4, 190T, which directed him to 
make an investigation of this question (see S. Doc. 91, oOth Cong., 1st 
sess.), on pages 30. 31, and 32, says: 

AREA AND LOCATION OF LANDS NEEDING PROTECTION. 

In order to determine tlie extent of the lands primarily available for forests in the 
Southern Appalachian and White Mountain regions, a reconnaissance survey has 
been made, as a result of which the accompanying maps have been prepared. Maps 
I and II show for the two regions the lands to be classed as distinctly mountainous 
and nonagricultural. 

15 



16 ACQUnUXG LA>CD FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

The main centers for .such iiiountainoua and nonajiricuhural lands in the Southern 
Appalachians are, first, the Blue Ridjje and Great Smoky Mountains of North 
Carolina and Tennessee, South Carolina and Georgia; second, the Allegheny Moun- 
tains of eastern and southern West Virginia and western Virginia, and, third, the 
Cumberland Mountains of eastern Kentucky, Tennessee, and northern Alabama. 
These lands include the main mountain ranges, and the roughest, wildest land of the 
region. Naturally, they embrace a smaller proportion of agiicultnral lands than 
other parts of the region, and those which they do embrace have for the most part 
been eliminated, as will be seen from the irregular boundaries on the map. Regard- 
less of these eliminations they still include some small bodies of agricultural lands. 

These areas, though they contain only 40 per cent of the timbered land of the 
Southern Appalachians, include almost all of the virgin timber lands, because the 
virgin timber which remains is mostly situated on the high mountains. P]ven though 
these lands do produce an inferior grade of timber, their sole use umst be for timber 
production. There is no other crop which will hold the gravelly, stony soil in place 
and keej) it from clogging the channels of streams and covering the agricultural 
valleys which lie below. These nonagricultural and mountainous lands, approxi- 
mating 23,000,000 acres, give rise to all the important streams which have their 
source in the Southern Appalachians. They are therefore the vital portions of these 
mountains. Whatever work is done to protect the Southern Appalachians must 
center in these areas. The proportion to which these lands fall into different States 
and watersheds is shown in the following tables: 



Table 4. 



-Area, hy States, of nonagricultural and moimtahioiis la,n(h 
Appalachians. 



the Southern 



State. 



Area. 



Acrts. 

Tennessee 4, 962, 000 

Virginia , 3, 8S2, OUO 

Alabama 491, 000 

Georgia i 1,806,000 

Kentuckv i 1, 6-'3, 000 

North Carolina i 3, 882, 000 



Acres. 

West Virginia :^. 797, 000 

South Carolina .=)90, 000 

Maryland : 277, 000 

Total 23, 310,000 



Table 5. — Area, hy watersheds, of nonagricultural and mountainous lands in the 
Southern Appalachians. 



Watershed. 



Tennessee 

Cumberland 

Holston 

.lames 

Roanoke (Stiiuntonj 
New (Kanawha) ... 

Big Sandy 

Hiawassee 

Little Tennessee. 

French Broad 

Pigeon 

Little River 

Monongahela 

Nolichncky 

You^hiogheny , 

Rapidan 



Acres. 

2, 489, 000 

2, 759, 000 

■582, 000 

1, 138, 000 

431.000 

3, 225, 000 

1,347,000 

1.066,000 

1,307,000 

623,000 

255, 000 

202, 000 

987,000 

379, 000 

117,000 

151, 000 



Watershed. 



Yadkin 

Big Pigeon 

Catawba 

Broad 

Potomac 

Chattahoochee 
Little Pigeon. . 
Twelve Pole . . 

Savannah 

Guyandotte . . . 

Saluda 

Kentucky 

Coosa 

Total.... 



Area. 



Acres. 

428, 000 

20,000 

502, 000 

299, 000 

2, 095, 000 

345, 000 

19,000 

1,000 

860,000 

660,000 

100,000 

156, 000 

767, 000 



23, 310, 000 



While the lands shown on the map are all in need of protection, they are not all 
of equal inportance w'hen all economic points of view are considered. 

The lands to be classed as of first importance include the mountain ridges mainly, 
but extend considerable distances down the slopes in those localities where the .soil 
is particularly subject to erosion and on the watersheds of streams of greatest impor- 
tance for water power or navigation. The area of such lands does not exceed 
5,000,000 acres 

The same class of land for the White Mountain region is shown in Map II. It 
lies in both New Hampshire and Maine. Excluding the numerous bodies of water, 
their area in New Hampshire is 1,457,000 acres, and in Maine 700,000 acres, mak- 



ACQUIRING LAND FOK PBOTECTION OF WATERSHEDS. ETC. 1 7 

ing a total of 2,157,000 acres. The proportion in which this falls in the five watey 
systems included is as follows: 

Acres. 

Connecticut 429, OOQ) 

Merrimac 264, 000 

.Saco 332, 000 

Androscoggin I, 002, 000 

Kennebec 130, 000 

Total 2, 157, 000 

There is also shown on this map an area embracing only the four main ranges of 
the White Mountains. A few thousand acres of this area lie in Maine. All the rest 
is in New Hampshire. This principal White Mountain area covers 668,000 acres, 
and, considering all economic points of view, is the most important part of the region. 

TREATMENT OF THE RECilON. 

The areas indicated in the preceding section, 23,310,000 acres in the Southern 
Appalachians and 2,157,000 acres in the White Mountains, do not include all the 
mountainous timber lands of the Appalachians. As is discussed under the heading 
"Importance of Appalachian forests for hard-wood supply," there are probably 
75,000,000 acres in this mountain system more important for timber production than 
for any other purpose. This area will have to be given protection before the hard- 
wood supply is on a safe footing and before th<> watersheds of the important streams 
are adequately safeguarded. 

If it i^s a wise policy for the Government to control b}- purchase or 
agreement with owners such large areas of land, and in addition 
thereto extensive areas included in this bill, but not included in the 
report of the Secretary of Agriculture, then it should be undertaken 
on a scale commensurate with its proposed linal extent, and for which 
appropriations many times the present amount will be required. 

This bill if enacted into law will inaugurate a system of new forest 
reserves whose final limits will include the lands the administration of 
which by the National Government may be said to conserve and regu- 
late stream flow and assist in maintaining the navigability of navigable 
rivers. In my opinion the proposed appropriation of $19,000,000 is 
suthcient only to make a beginning and to commit the Government to 
the policy. It initiates one of the most extensive and momentous 
movements ever begun in this country hj legislative action. It seems 
to me there of necessity should be required prior thereto an exceed- 
ingly thoroughgoing and exhaustive investigation by competent author- 
ity of all the problems involved, for the information of the country 
and of Congress, and if thereafter the proposed policy is considered 
wise and within the powers of Congress, a measure should be prepared 
that will present the matter in all its magnificence to the country and 
provide adequate appropriations for executing the policy, and granting 
all necessary authority therefor. 

Does the present bill authorize the commission to use the power of 
eminent domain to obtain from unwilling owners the lands deemed 
necessary'^ If not, is not the omission of such authority an error? 

I fear, also, that when the Government goes into the market to 
purchase from private parties the lands for the new forest reserves 
great difficulties will be encountered, arising out of speculations in 
these lands. 

The committee liave held many hearings on this suf)iect, the net 
result of which discloses the lack of accurate and adequate data. For 
the purpose of securing carefully collected and scientifically presented 

H. Rep. 2027. 60-2 2 



18 AC^QL'IKING LAND FOR PKOTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

information on all pluiises of the .subject, 1 introduced a bill at the last 
session, and the fact that the information called for by it is not availa- 
ble seems to ju^itity the printino- of it as an appendix. 
Truly yours, 

W. C. Hawley. 



(H. K. 21S77. Sixtieth Coiigresfi. lirst session. 1 

K BILL J'li |>ri)\ iiltr lor obtaining certain information relative to the Wliite Mountain. A))pabi( liian. 
and other watersheds and fore.sts. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and Houne of Representatives of the United States of America 
ill Congress assemhied, That a commission consisting of three men, whose duties are 
deflned below, shall be appointed as follows: One by the President of the United 
States, one l)y the President of the Senate, and one by the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives. 

Sec. 2. That the duties of this commission shall be as follows: 

First. Personally to visit every watershed in the States named in section seven of 
this act supposed to have influence in regulating the flow of waters and conservation 
(>f water supply in the maintenance of the navigability of navigable rivers, and for 
other purposfS. 

Second. To establish by metes and bounds the limits of such watersheds and to 
actually ascertain the areas included. 

Third. To ascertain how much of such areas arc now forested and the kinds and 
sizes of the trees and other growths thereon. 

Fourth. The general nature and character of the soil of these watersheds and the 
general topography of said watersheds. 

Fifth. To asi-ertain how much of such areas are now deforested and the condition 
of the defoiested lands. 

Sixth. To ascertain what portions of the deforested areas can be reforested, how 
much can not be reforested, and the probable cost and period of time required for 
reforestation of such areas. 

Seventh. To ascertain whether these watersheds have a deflnite and demonstrable 
physical connection, mediate or immediate, with the maintenance and improvement 
of the navigability of naviga])le rivers. 

Eighth. To ascertain as accurately as possible the value of the lands of each water- 
shed and the price at which they can be acquired. 

Ninth. To ascertain whether any of these watershed areas will be transferred to 
ihe United States, either as a gift or to be placed under the control of the United 
States, and if so, for what length of time. 

Tenth. If the question implieti in paragi-aph seven is decided aflirmatively, to 
ascertain whether the control of the watershed areas will be sufficient for the con- 
servation and improvement of the navigaliility of navigable rivers, or whether the 
control of areas below and other than the watershed areas will be necessary for that 
purpose. If areas other than watershed areas are decided to be necessary, then such 
areas shall be definitely located and measured, and their values and the prices for 
which they can be bought shall l>e ascertained. 

Eleventh. To ascertain the annual precipitation on each watershed area as nearly 
as possible and for as long a period of years preceding as possible. 

Twelfth. To estimate the probable annual revenues, if any, from such watershed 
and other areas and the cost of administration yearly if acquired by the Government. 

Thirteenth. To ascertain the miles on each river supposed to be directly or indi- 
rectly benefited that are now navigable, and the numlier of months each such river 
is navigable, the depth of water for each month, and the di-aft of vessels using same. 

Fourteenth. To ascertain the increase or diminution of the miles of navigable 
water in each such river and the depths of water therein for tlie longest period of 
years possible. 

Fifteenth. To ascertain the amount of commerce carried, by months, on each such 
river for the longest period of years possible. 

Sixteenth. To ascertain the effects of erosion due to the denudation of watershed 
or other areas and the damage effected thereby. 

Seventeenth. To ascertain what effect on high and low water in rivers the <lrainage 
and tiling of farm land has had. 

Eighteenth. To ascertain who are the present owners of the areas referred to in 
this act and when thev obtained sucli lands. 



ACQUIRING LAND FOE PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 19 

Nineteenth. To ascertain whether large tracts have been recently acquired and 
whether options have been taken on the lands, and if eo, in what (juantities. 

Twentieth. To ascertain the amount of timber cut on the watersheds aforesaid 
yearly and the rate of such cutting for a period of years as long as possible. 

Twenty-first. To ascertain the facts in the development of water power in such 
areas. 

Sec. 3. That the said commission shall have authority to employ expert and 
unskilled labor necessary to enable them to perform the duties imposed upon them 
and to fix compensation therefor. 

Sec. 4. That each of said three commissioners shall be i)aid at the rate of five hun- 
dred dollars per month and shall receive compensation for necessary personal expenses 
incurred in the discharge of their duties. 

Sec. 5. That there is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not 
otherwise appropriated, the sum of thirty thousand dollars to provide payment for 
services and expenses authorized by this act. 

Sec. 6. That said commission shall report completely, finally, and in full on or 
before February first, nineteen hundred and nine. 

Sec. 7. That the watersheds and other areas described in this act, and which the 
commission herein provided shall investigate under the provisions of this act, are those 
located in the following States: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Penn- 
sylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia. Virginia. Maryland, North 
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and .Alabama. 



VIEWS OF MR, HAUGEN. 

Before entering- upon such a gigantic scheme as is contemplated in 
the proposed bill, one which in the end in all probabilities will invoh^e 
the expenditure of not millions but billions of dollars, Congress should 
have detailed and accurate information in order that the matter might 
be carefull}^ h\\\y, and intelligently considered. It should at least 
have data, or reliable estimates, as to the probable cost, the number of 
acres that should be purchased for the preservation of the forests 
within the watersheds of the navigable rivers not only in the White 
Mountains and the Southern Appalachian Mountains, but over the 
whole country. The oni}- official information available at the present 
time is that obtained under the act of Congress of March 4. 1907, 
which "requires the Secretary of Agriculture to investigate the water- 
sheds of the Southern Appalachian and White Mountains and to 
report to Congress the area and natural conditions of said watersheds, 
the price at which the same can be purchased by the Government, and 
the advisability of the Government purchasing and setting apart the 
same as national forest reserves for the purpose of conserving and 
regulating the water supply and flow of said streams in the interest 
of agriculture, water power, and navigation." 

In this report the Secretary recommends that the Government 
acquire an area of about G, 000,000 acres at once, and states that an 
area of about 75,000,000 acres will have to be given protection. The 
Secretary has this to say (p. 32): 

It is an enormous undertakinji to bring this imuienee area of 75,000,000 acres under 
proper conditions of protection and use. If the Government owned the land the 
problem would l)e a comparatively simple one under our present forest policy. 

I conclude from this that it is necessary to purchase the 75,000.000 
acres to begin with. As to the method of acquirement and cost of 
lands the Secretary has this to say: 

WHITE MOUNTAINS. 

The timber lands of the White Mountains are in the main held by a few large com- 

f)anies, nearly all of whom are cutting extensively on the spruce stands for pulp or 
umber manufacture. The plants of some of these companies represent an investment 
of several hundred thousand dollars. Manifestly, in negotiating for these lands, in 
80 far as they bear uncut timber, the value of the plant must enter into the consid- 
eration. In addition, the stumpage value of spruce ranges from !f;4.50 to $6 or f 7 per 
thousand. This would give the best stands a value of ?75 to |125 or more per acre. 
******* 

The hard woods of the White Mountains, of which there is a large area, have not 
the value of spruce, nor are they as yet being extensively cut. Their stumpage value 
is from 12.50 to $4 per thousand, depending upon location, stand, and quality. 

The cut-over lands have a value ranging from |1 to $6 or $8 per acre, depending 
upon the condition of the timber growth upon them. 

The question of the acquirement of timber lands by the Government has been con- 
sidered with the principal owners of the region. While unwilling to dispose of their 

20 



ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 21 

virgin timber lands, excejit at very high prices, they are wilHng to consider the sale 
of their cut-over lands, the lands lying too high for lumbering, and the mountain tops. 
A careful study of the situation leads to the conclusion that most of the lands of 
these classes can be bought at an average price of $6 per acre. 

SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS, 

In the iSouthern Appalachians the timber lands are owned by large companies to a 
less extent than in the White Mountains, but even here as much as 50 per cent of 
many localities is under such ownership. 

Timber-land owners in the Southern Appalachians are generally inclined to sell 
their lands to the Government at a reasonable price, regardless of whether the lands 
contain virgin timber or are cut over. Furthermore many of them are favorable to 
the transfer of their lands, themselves retaining the right to cut and remove certain 
kinds of timber above specified sizes. 

In considering the practicability of the Government's purchasing land for national 
forests in the Southern Appalachians conference has been freely had with tiuiber- 
land owners, lumbermen, real estate dealers, and title examiners. Moreover, atten- 
tion has been paid to the sales which have been made during the past two years and 
the prices which have been paid. 

The price of virgin hard-wood land varies from |5 to $12 per acre, depending on 
iiccefcsibility and kind and quality of timber. Cut-over lands are worth from $2 to $5 
per acre, tlieir value likewise depending upon their location and the condition of the 
timber growth upon them. 

From this report, or an\' otlier information available, who can figure 
out the probable outlay of mone}^? No data is furnished as to the 
number of acres of the $75 and $\2i) per acre land. There is no data as 
to the number of plants. All that is known is that some of these lands 
are valued at from $75 to $125 per acre, and that there are plants there 
representing an investment of several hundred thousand dollars, and 
that the value of the plants must enter into the consideration. No 
data is given as to the number of acres of hard w'ood, except that there 
is a Uirge area. No data is given as to the number of acres of cut-over 
land, valued at from $1 to ^S per acre, except that it is believed that 
most of the land of these classes can l)e bought at an average price of 
$6 per acre. 

Suppose the average price of all the 75, <XH»,()0(> acres to be purchased 
in this region is $20 per aci'c, it would mean an investment of one and 
one-half billion dollars, an amount more than six times the cost of the 
building of the Panama Canal, or nearly twice the amount of our 
present interest-bearing del)t, or four times the value of the total 
annual products of the Iowa farms. 

The Secretary reports that these timber lands are in the main held 
by a few large companies. This means large prices. Besides, the 
Government generally pays more for what it buys and will have to 
pay larger prices than would have to be paid by individuals in pur- 
chasing the same lands. 

The Secretary reports that the principal owners of lands are unwill- 
ing to dispose of their virgin timber lands, except at a very high 
price: that the cut-over lands, lands lying too high for lumbering, 
and the mountain tops, or, in other words, that only such lands as are 
not needed or desired for this or any other purpose are offered for 
sale. 

Considering the Secretary's report and the fact that the purchase of 
the 75,0(H»,000 acres, involving an expenditure of probably over a 
billion dollars, is probably only a small part of the land necessary to 
be acquired, as undoubtedly enterprising and patriotic real estate 
owners in other parts of the country would be willing to unload their 



22 ACQITJKIA'C; LAND FOR PROTECTION OK WATERSHEDS, ETC. 

lands onto the Govt'i-nnicnt. especially when the price is to be very 
high, and will insist that there be an equitable disirit>ution of these 
l)illions of dollais; and considering also the enormity of the whole 
proposition, is it not the part of wisdom, common sense, and sound 
business judgment first to obtain detailed, accurate, and reliable infor- 
mation in order that a comprehensive, well-devised, and practical 
policy may be worked out and followed? 

Considering also that the ])roposed ])ill is an entering wedge to such 
a g-igantic proposition, I feel consti'ained to dissent from the views of 
the majority, and believe that for the present that II. R. 21US6. passed 
the first session of this Congress, is the proper legislation. Its pro- 
visions are clearly set forlTi in Report No. ITOO, a copy of which is 
appended. 

(iiiJiKRT N. Hauokn. 



[Housf Kfpml N". 1700, Sixtieth ('(iii.mvss, (iist t^t'ssidii.] 

The Committee on Atiricultnre, lo whu'h was leferred House bill 2UtHH. has had 
the same under consideration and reports as follows: 

At the bejiinnii g of the present session a number of bills were introduced and 
referred to the Committee on Agriculture having for their general purpose the pur- 
chase of certain tracts of land in the White Mountains and in the Southern Appala- 
chain Mountains with a view to preserving the forests on said lands and conserving 
the flow in the rivers liaving their sources therein. The committee considered its 
most pressing duty to be, first, to prepare the appropriation bill for the Department 
of Agriculture. Before the consideration of this bill had been completed a resolu- 
tion was introduced by Representative Bartlett, of Georgia, providing that the bills 
above mentioned, commonly known as the White Mountain and Appalachain Park 
forest-reserve bills, be referred to the Committee on the Judiciaiy with the request 
that that committee render an opinion as to the constitutionality of the proposed 
measures. This resolution was ado})ted by the House, and the bills were referred 
accordingly. Pending thej-eport of the Committee on the Judiciary the Committee 
on Agriculture was of the opinion that it could not jtroperly give consideration to 
these measures. 

On April 20, 1908, the Committee on the Judiciary rendereil an opinion to the 
effect that the United States would have no right to ]>urchase lands for the purpose 
of creating a forest reserve, but that Congress might api^rojiriatc for the purchase of 
lands having a direct and substantial connection with the navigability of navigable 
rivers. As a result of this decision, Representatives who had introduced the bills 
which had been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary modified and reintro- 
duced theui, and they were again referred to the Committee on Agriculture, which 
took up the consideration of them at the earliest possible date. After liearing testi- 
mony and considering the bills for several days it became evident that the commit- 
tee, with the information then before it, was unwillinu; to favorably recommend any 
measure committing the t-nitetl States to the policy of purchasing forest lands. The 
whole matter was therefore referred to a sub&nmnittee, with instructions to recon*- 
mend to the full committee such action as it was deemed proper to take. As a result 
of the deliberations of this subcommittee, the bill, H. I-J. 21986, was reported to the 
full committe;^, and l)y its action is herewith reported to the House. 

It is a matter of common knowledge that the forests in the \^ hite Mountains and 
in the southern Appalachian Motmtains are being rapidly destroyed, and the desira- 
bility of preserving what remains of "^hem, or at least of introducing methods of 
lumbering which will prevent the destruc'tion of immature tiniber and will protect 
the forests from fire, is universally conceded, not only for the perpetuation of the 
timber supply, but also for the conservation of the fiow of water in the streams 
having their source wittiin these forests. The problem as to how this desiied end 
should be reached has been widely discussed and has awakened profound interest 
throughout the entire country. As a result of this discussion four distinct methods 
have been suggested. 

First. It has been held by many that the problem was one belonging exclusively 
to the States concerned. Those holding this view have argued that the Federal 
Government has no constitutional authority to purchase lands for the purpose of 
conserving the forests upon them, even though such preservation may conserve the 



ACQUIRING LAND FOR PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC. 23 

j^upply of water in navigable streanl^^. They hold tliat tlit* matter is one over which 
the States' have exclusA-e jurisdiction, and that if the right exists it is the duty of the 
State to assume the responsibility of meeting it. 

Second. Another view is that while it is neither the right nor the duty of the Fed- 
eral Uovernment to purchase the forests it may properly cooj^erate with the States 
or with private owners in their preservation by furnishing expert advice and assist- 
ance in their proper utilization and administration. 

Third. Still another view is that when it is shown that the forests of a given water- 
shed have a direct and substantial connection witli the navigability of the navigable 
rivers flowing from that watershed the P'ederal Government has the right to exercise 
jurisdiction over the forests therein, although they remain in jirivate ownership, and 
prescribe the method which shall be followed in utilizing the forests within such 
watershed. 

Fourth. The last, and doubtless the most generally advocated plan, proposes that 
the Federal Government shall buy all the land that may be necessary to protect the 
watersheds of navigable rivers and exercise over the forests growing upon them all 
the rights and privileges of absolute ownersliip. 

The bill now before the House was drawn with a view to meeting, in a measure at 
least, each of these four proposed plans. The first section proposes to give the con- 
sent of Congress to each of the several States of the Union which may wish to do so 
to enter into such agreement or compact, not in conflict with any law of the United 
States, as it may deem desirable or necessary, with any other State or States for the 
purpose of conserving the forests and the water supply of the States entering into 
such agreement or compact. It has been often urged, by those who insist that the 
Federal (Tovernment should jjurchase the forests under consideration, that the 
problem is interstate, and in view of the constitutional inhibition against a State 
entering into any agreement or compact with another the proper treatment of the 
problem is made impossible to the States alone. If section 1 of this bill becomes a 
law this obstacle to cooperation between and among the States will be removed. 

Section 2 of the bill approi)riates the sum of 1100,000 to enable the Secretary of 
Agriculture to cooperate with any State or group of States, when requested to do so, 
by supplying expert advice on forest preservation, utilization, and administration, 
and upon reforestation of denuded areas. It also authorizes the Secretary of Agri- 
culture to enter into agreement with the owners of any private forest lands situated 
upon the wate shed (ff a navigable river, to administer and protect such forest land 
upon such terms as the Secretary of Agriculture may prescribe. It is believed that 
under the authority given in this section many thousands of acres of forest lands will 
be brought as effecluall\- within the jurisdiction of the United States for all the pur- 
poses of scientific forestry as if these lands were actually owned by the Government. 

Section 8 of the bill provides for the appointment of a commission to be composed 
of five Members of the Senate, to be appointed by the presiding officer thereof, and 
five Members of the House of Representatives, to "be appointed by the Speaker. 

Section 4 makes it the duty of this commission to investigate all questions tending 
fo show the direct and substantial connection, if any, between the preservation of 
the forests within the watersheds of the navigable rivers having their sources in the 
White Mountains and Southern Appalachian Mountains, and the navigability of said 
rivers. .And in case the commission shall determine that such direct and substantial 
connection exists, it shall then be its duty to ascertain to what extent, if at all, U 
may be necessary for the Government of the United States to acquire land within 
the watersheds referred to. the number of acres of such land, and the probable cost, 
or whether it may be desirable, if within the power of the United States to exercise, 
without purchase, such supervision over such watersheds as may 1>p necessary to 
conserve the navigability of the rivers proceeding therefrom. 

Under the provisions of this section all the questions arising out of the proposal 
that the Federal Government purchase the forests or that it exercise jurisdiction 
over them without purchase, may be carefully studied and fully considered. It is 
true that by an act of the last Congress the Secr^^tary of Agriculture was authorized 
to report and did report upon the watersheds of the Southern Appalachian and 
White mountains, the purpose of the report being to present to Congress "the area 
and natural conditions of said watersheds, the price at which the same can be pur- 
chased by the Federal Government, and the advisability of the Government pur- 
chasing and setting aside the same as national forest reserves for the purpose of con- 
serving and regulating the water supply and the flow (jf said streams in the interest 
of agriculture, water power, and navigation." 

Without mtending any reflection upon those who prepared tiiis report, it may be 
fairly said that it does not present such detailed and accurate information as any 
<-areful business man would insist upon having before entering upon a policy which 



24 ACQUmiJMG LfAWD FOE PROTECTION OF WATERSHEDS, ETC, 

was to involve the expenditure of many millions of dollars. It does not indicate the 
extent of the navigable portions of the rivers whose navigabiMty it is desired to pro- 
tect nor the value of the forests upon them. It presents no data showing to what 
extent, if at all, the vokime or tlie steadiness of stream flow has been influenced by 
the destruction of the forests. It shows in only the most general way the location, 
area, and probable cost of the lands it is proposed to purchase. 

While it recommends (p. 37) that the Government acquire an area of 600,000 acres 
in the White Mountains and 5,000,000 aeies in the southern Appalachian Mountains, 
it states also (p. 32) that an area of 75,000,000 acres will have to be given protection 
"before the watersheds and important streams are adequately safeguarded," suggest- 
ing the thought that while less than 7,000,000 acres are to be purchased at once, 
75,000,000 acres must ultimately be acquired if the watersheds of the important 
streams are to be "adequately safeguarded." Your committee is of the opinion that 
if a commission of ten members of the legislative body, responsible to their constit- 
uents and to the country for whatever report they may make, is directed to investigate 
the subject, the information presented in its report will be sufficiently comprehensive 
and exact to enable Congress to intelligently legislate upon the subject. The commis- 
sion is given authority to employ experts and such clerical assistants as may be 
needed, and is required to report to the President not later than January 1, 1H09. 

Believing that this bill, by opening the way for the States to cooperate with one 
another, puts it within their power to contribute much to the solution of this impor- 
tant problem; that the provision it makes for cooperation between the United States, 
the States, and private owners of forest lands nmst contribute greatly to the rapid 
extension of scientific forestry; and that by means of the commission for which it 
provides the most careful study of the whole problem with a view to future legisla- 
tion is made possible, and that for these reasons the proposed legislation will be of 
great public advantage, your committee respectfully reports the bill back to the House 
with the recommendation that it do pass. 



I I 



